Budhikhamari village is in Mayurbhanj District, north-east
Orissa, near to the border with the neighbouring state of West
Bengal. The characteristic forest of this region is sal, (Shorea
robusta), which constitutes the dominant species in a large
belt of forest that extends across the humid east, from the
Chotanagpur plateau of Bihar, through West Bengal and Orissa.
Orissa represents the approximate southern distribution for sal,
and is the state where the two dominant species of Indian forests
meet, sal and teak, (Tectona grandis) (Padhi, 1994).

Budhikhamari village is a mixed village of different castes,
with a small adivasi population, also. The settlement is in an
area, Mayurbhanj District that has a high percentage of adivasis.
Out of the 130 households in Budhikhamari, 5 are big landholders,
owning or occupying land more than 3 acres, 10 are landless, and
the rest own or occupy smallholdings of less than 2.5 acres, from
which a single, rain-fed crop of paddy is produced.

The sal forests of Budhikhamari have a history of intensive
exploitation and deforestation that can be traced back to the
colonial era. Mayurbhanj District came under British occupation
in 1803. The dense forest of the area was appropriated to serve
the needs of empire, and zamindars encouraged the spread of
villages and cultivation. Writing in 1895-96, the British Forest
Officer of the time, Mr C.C Hart notes:

'The plains and accessible parts have nearly all been
denuded of mature sal, except in one place in the plains of the
south-west' (in Mishra, 1993).

Since independence, the local sal forests have continued to be
subjected to severe degradation, some areas being clear-felled
for industry, but also by the timber mafia; a highly
organised group that illegally fells and smuggles timber from the
forests, and of course unorganised subsistence demands. In the
absence of any co-ordinated, rigorous management, and due to
degraded village commons also (Mishra, 1993), the diminishing
forests were therefore subjected to increasing pressure from the
local population (some of which gained temporary employment from
contractors, possibly also the timber mafia, for helping fell
their local forests -Mishra (1993) describes it as a nexus
between the greedy rich and the needy poor).

Considerable deforestation occurred in this region in the 1960s,and by the early 1980s, the local population was
experiencing a scarcity of forest resources, particularly
firewood, and also relate some other negative effects that they
attribute to the large-scale loss of forested land. Streams
reportedly dried up and wells ran dry, while wind erosion of
agricultural land increased. Villagers report to having to
increase the amount of organic matter to crops, to maintain
fertility. Locals also report a perceived reduction in the amount
and intensity of rain, as attributable to forest loss. The forest
of Budhikhamari by the early 1980s was severely degraded,
and locals were having to coppice sal, though at this time, the
forest was apparently little more than a metre high.
Therefore, the little wood that was being generated from sal
rootstock was being harvested at a rate faster than replenishment,
and barely reaching a metre in height. The estimated household
need of 15-20 quintals (1 quintal = 100 Kg) of wood was not being
met by the degraded forest.

At this low point, the villagers were afraid the little wood
they harvested would simply run out, as they had experienced a
decline in available fuel year on year. Further, the timber mafia
became increasingly active in the area, which fuelled conflict,
and acted as a catalyst in spontaneous forest protection (Padhi,
pers. comm.). Consequently, in 1982 the Sarpanch or village head,
Gorachand Mohanta, called a meeting between several of the
villages around the adjacent forests, and the group declared a
moratorium on the collection of wood from several areas of forest,
which they would protect. From this initial meeting, the
Budhikhamari Village Forest Protection Committee was formed. The
group essentially followed the same structure as the village
panchayats, or village councils. With the consensus of the
villages involved, areas were set aside from use, listed in table
7.1with the aim that complete protection would allow
regeneration.

Instead of using wood for fuel, the villagers of Budhikhamari
used agricultural wastes, usually paddy residue. By 1987 the
protected areas of forest were beginning to regenerate and the
Budhikhamari VFPC was brought to the attention of the Forest
Department, who sought to formalise the VFPC structure, and
incorporate it into the JFM scheme. Briefly, under JFM in Orissa,
a committee is formed, which generally stipulates a greater
representation of the village. As well as 5 volunteers from each
village, there must be two additional women, and usually some
specific provision is made for scheduled caste or adivasi. In
this way the hegemony of power often found in the village
panchayat can potentially be overcome.

Budhikhamari and some surrounding villages, 95 in total were
consequently organised into a Joint Forest Protection Committee.
To ensure that the areas of forest were protected, a rota system
of policing was organised, called Thengapalli, whereby a stick is
passed around the households of the village, whose responsibility
it is to patrol the protected areas near their village. In
addition, a permanent and salaried mobile patrol force of 30 was
organised, funded by small donations, usually Rs5 from each
household per month. Revenue is also raised by charging outside
users a rupee a bag for small amounts of lopped wood and twigs.
Punitive measures and fines were introduced for anyone found
taking wood, and if significant amounts of wood are recovered
from an illegal felling, the proceeds from the sale fund further
protection. In this way, forests around Budhikhamari have been
protected since the early 1980s.

To determine the impact and effectiveness of forest protection,
fieldwork was undertaken in the woods around Budhikhamari. The
population structure of sal, the dominant species, was considered,
as a measure of regeneration. Ordinarily, a forest should have
varied age classes from young to senescent trees. It was hoped
that, if the forest was severely degraded twenty years before,
and less than one metre high, this would be reflected in a study
of the population structure, where only young trees should be
found. Also, features of management may be discerned through
sampling.

Methodology in the field

Six areas were picked that were considered representative
of the forest, and a plot of 20 X 20m was marked off with
coloured string. Here, two distinct areas were each
sampled three times; one area was last coppiced in 1971/2,
referred to as old coppice and the other area
was last coppiced in 1975/6, referred to as new
coppice'. Although it is more customary to use plots of
10 X 10m when sampling forest, here a larger plot was
considered necessary as population structure was being
examined.

All trees in each plot were identified to species (in the
field, most trees other than sal were noted by their
local names usually, and then formally identified later).

All trees greater than 10cm in diameter were measured.
Girth at breast height (GBH), (approximately 130cm) was
recorded.

Analysis

Frequency diagrams of the sal sampled from six sites were
constructed. GBH measurements were converted into age
classes. This was achieved by using a foresters
handbook (Maslekar, 1977), which features outturn and
yield tables of Shorea robusta. Idealised diameter
was calculated from the girth.Although only 10
year classes are considered in this handbook, a graph was
made, and 5 year classes in-between were read from the
graph. In this way 5-year age classes, in cm were
calculated. Sal measurements of GBH were then designated
to age classes.

Densities of sal per metre were calculated.

A Kruskal-Wallace test for the GBH at 6 sites was
undertaken, to determine any statistical difference
between them. (The data was interpreted as non-normally
distributed, and appeared to have a positive skew) H=[12/(N(N+1)
x (S Ri2/NI)]-3(N+1)

Basal area (m2) and volume (m3) for
Shorea robusta were calculated per hectare.

Standing biomass and leaf productivity for Shorea
robusta were calculated per hectare.

Table 7.2 shows the data collected from Budhikhamari Forest.
Six sites were sampled in total, in two areas of forest under
different management scenarios. Sites 1,2,3 were 'old coppice',
while sites 4,5,6 were 'new coppice'. Variation between sites is
evident. Generally, fewer trees were found in the older sites;
197 trees total at sites1-3, compared to 287 total trees at sites
4-6, therefore tree densities are lower (except site 2, which at
0.22, is marginally greater than the tree density site 5, at 0.21
trees per m2). Older sites also showed fewer tree species. Mean
number of species in sites1-3 is 5, compared to 7 for the younger
sites. However, statistically, no difference was found between
the six sites. A Kruskal-Wallace test employed on the data found
H=9.8, smaller than the critical chi square (P=0.05, df=5), 11.07,
thus any difference between sites was not statistically
significant.

Sal clearly dominates all six sites, and accounts for over 85%
(mean percentage) of all trees sampled in Budhikhamari Forest.
Relative proportions of tree species are shown graphically in
figure 7.2. The rank abundance diagram in fig:7.6 appears
geometric, and indicates an inequitable distribution of species.
Shannon diversity index was calculated as 0.66, while
equitability was relatively low, at 0.25. Figures 7.1a-l show the
age structure of Shorea robusta in sites 1-6. Generally,
few age classes are present, of which 49% are in the age-class of
10-14 years, as can be seen from figures 7.4 and 7.5. Oldest sal
are found in site 3, and are no more than 34 years old.

Thirteen other tree species were observed in Budhikhamari
Forest, sites 1-6. Aggregate frequency diagrams of these other
species are shown in figures 7.3a-l, demonstrating their sparse
distribution. Most are seen to occur singly, or in very low
numbers, with the notable exception of Terminalia tomestosa. However,
these other species are found to be of small girth; the largest
was found to be Jaia at a maximum of 53cm girth.

Below shows the calculations for basal area, volume, standing
biomass and leaf productivity. Mean basal area, per hectare was
14.57m2, while mean volume per hectare was 70.14m3.
Standing biomass was calculated as 61.9 tonnes per hectare, mean
and leaf productivity per hectare, per year, was calculated as 3.23
dry tonnes per year, 2761 tonnes for the whole of Budhikhamari
Forest.

Figure 7.2 shows the relative proportions of tree species in
the six sampled sites of Budhikhamari Forest. In all sites sal
clearly dominates, accounting for over 80% of the trees in each
site. Although thirteen other species are also present, these are
sparsely distributed over the six sampled areas. Nonetheless, the
additional species are often considered as 'useful' species, such
as jamu, (Syzygium cumini), valued for its edible berries,
arjun (Terminalia arjuna), for medicine and tannins, and
its wood is considered good for furniture making.

Although no quantitative data was taken from the ground layer,
it was noted that there were many shrubs, but more notably, an
abundance of young saplings in all six sites sampled. Where the
canopy was more open, due to fewer trees, e.g. site 3 density
trees/m2 = 0.12, compared to site 6 where density
trees/m2 =0.25, the ground flora was more dense and
greater in height, making movement around the site sometimes
difficult. The saplings were frequently sal, but other species
were also noted. Together, the data suggests that that the forest
is being protected and managed overwhelmingly for sal on a quasi-commercial
basis; for timber, for seeds, which yield oil, and for leaves,
which are widely used in plate-making - a thriving local cottage
industry (see plate 7.2 below), though of course, the
villagers' biomass needs are also catered for. The virtual
monoculture of Shorea robusta is also indicative of
intensive use in the past; sal being a hardy coppicer has managed
to regenerate from cropping, almost to the exclusion of other,
less hardy local species (Mishra, 1993). As such, intensive
coppicing has resulted in very low tree diversity in this region,
which is probably exacerbated by the quasi-commercial goals of
the present management regime.

Overall
management of the forest seems to be rather ad-hoc and perhaps
too informal. As Singh, (1991) points out in a book about
community-based forest management systems, forest management is
referred to as a system of use regulation and rules regarding
protection, rather than strictly technical, or 'scientific'
management of forests. A similar distinction appears to be
relevant here. The president of Budhikhamari VFPC, Gorachand
Mohanta, indicated that timber extraction is undertaken when
density of sal is high, and thinning is perceived as necessary (borne
out to some extent, by collected data), otherwise some coppicing
is undertaken. No organised and regular extraction occurs, such
as the working of coupes in conventional forestry. When wood in
any significant quantity of timber is needed by a villager, other
than for a cremation, they must apply to the committee. Whether
such an informal management can form the basis of a robust and
sustainable regime, is perhaps open to question.

Forest age and management

The frequency diagrams (Figures 7.1a-e) clearly show the
forest is young, either because effective protection has allowed
regeneration from a degraded state, or because the harvest rate
and management regime does not allow trees to age beyond a
certain limit, or perhaps both.

This fieldwork shows that the sal, much of it coppiced, is no
older than 30 years, though one site in the old
coppice area of 1971/1972 shows trees of upto 35 years. Generally,
few age classes are present, and most (49%), are in the age-class
of 10-14 years, for the old and the new coppiced sites. The data
appear to indicate that trees over the age of 15 years are
harvested, either selectively thinned as part of a long-term
management strategy, or used as a timber resource. It is possible
that sites 1,2,3 are further along the management cycle. These
sites have, in total 197 trees, in contrast to the more densely
populated sites 4-6, which were found to have a total of 284.
Sites 4-6 are also found to have more trees in the age class 10-14
years, which might indicate that thinning would be undertaken
soon, if the management regime is similar across sites. Sites 4-6
are found to have more older trees present, perhaps reflecting
the greater proximity from Budhikhamari Village, and also
indicating a more intensive use by the village of the closer
sites 1-3. However, statistically, no significant difference was
found between the six sites.

As this analysis is a snapshot of the forest at
the time of sampling, it is not possible to determine from this
data what the forest was like at any time in the past. The data
therefore does not necessarily support the information given by
the villagers that the forest was little more than scrub one
metre high in the 1970s, though nor does it contradict it.
Given that several villagers offered anecdotes about the degraded
state of the forest about twenty years ago, it seems, in all
probability, that the regeneration of forest has occurred, but
whether it will remain in a similar state is not possible to
predict.

What is not possible to extrapolate from this data, is what
the population structure may be in 10, 20 years time. If there is
an increased age to the forest, forest protection will prove to
be a significant and successful component in long term forest
regeneration. On the other hand, an intense regime of harvesting
may well stall the forest at an interrupted successional level.
There is nothing wrong with that per se, and forest harvested at
10-15 years is preferable, from a resource-yield viewpoint, than
forest less than one metre high.

However, ultimately, if demand is found to increase in the
near future, then the long term future of this regenerating
forest may be jeopardised, as harvest is already maximised at a
very low age class, about 15 years here.

Effects of forest regeneration

Villagers of Budhikhamari relay an overall improvement in
their quality of life since the rejuvenation of the forest.
Although they are not as critically dependent on the forest as
their families were earlier in the century, forest resources are
currently valued for both subsistence and their role in cottage
industries. Protection of the forest has allowed regeneration,
which has considerably increased wood availability. While
degraded scrub shows a negligible or zero basal area, which by
all accounts describes Budhikhamari twenty years ago, the
regenerated forest was found to have a mean basal area of 14.57m2ha-1. Calculations of timber volume show a range
from 46 to 99 m3 ha-1, while the mean
volume was found to be 70.14 m3 ha-1.Standing
biomass, shown in table 7.3 gives an indication of total biomass,
including twigs. According to the Methods Manual on JFM,
approximately 5% of standing biomass can be harvested annually,
and sustained. Therefore, from the total standing biomass shown
for Budhikhamari, of 52924.5 tonnes, it follows that 2646 tonnes,
or 26462 quintals can be harvested sustainably. Interestingly,
this figure is approximately an order of magnitude greater than
the biomass needs of the village, based on every household (130),
requiring 15-20 quintals, as reported by the villagers, giving a
total of 260 tonnes, or 2600 quintals. Therefore, the village's
biomass needs are being adequately met by the forest once more.

With an increase in sal, there has been an increase in leaves,
which, by the Sarpanch's estimation employs 80% of Budhikhamari's
households (particularly women) in the making and pressing of
plates. Calculations find that the regenerating forest produces
approximately 2760 tonnes of dry leaves, therefore signifying an
increased potential in cottage industries for the villagers.
Whether this has made a tangible difference to the household
economy though, is more a political question, as marketing of sal
leaves are either through the government, or through commercial
dealers, both of which pay a rate that does not necessarily
reflect the work involved. Co-operative marketing in Budhikhamari
village has not been possible, due to the poverty of the people.

Although species richness of the forest has been widely noted
by the villagers as declining since earlier in the century, there
are still resources that are appreciated and are considered as a
dietary supplement, such as tubers and fungi. Non-edible
resources are many and include wood for implements, oils, tannins,
and lac and binding material; of which a 'new' species had just
been discovered. Resources from the forest had increased over the
last twenty years. Villagers had also noted an increase in
animals, such as deer, bear, wild cat, porcupines, reptiles, even
a recent visitation from a tusker, which was seen as an
additional positive factor.

The villagers also perceive an improvement in their
environment, as attributable to increased forest cover; a
reduction in organic material necessary to maintain fertility in
the fields, a reduction of wind erosion, and an increase in the
local water table (though this could not be investigated further,
due to time constraints). The perceived services of forest,
therefore, may be a strong motivating factor in protection.

Conclusion

According to Malhotra et al (1998), the British, through the
zamindars, exploited sal on a coppice rotation of 5-15 years in
south West Bengal. By the 1940's vast tracts were denuded of tree
cover, and such an intensive regime could not be maintained. It
is interesting to note that sal appears to be worked on rotation
of fifteen years in Budhikhamari, which begs the question as to
the sustainability of the current regime. Certainly if cycles are
shortened, then the forest may become degraded again, however, as
noted earlier, this would depend upon management of and demand
for sal products in the future. Management, however, appears to
be rather ad-hoc, and may not be organised or robust enough to
form a lasting, sustainable system.

Although the data cannot explicitly support the notion of
forest regeneration, as it is no more than a snapshot of the
present forest, the data, nonetheless shows a young forest. Along
with anecdotes of regeneration, and of course, the work of the
Village Forest Protection Committee, formed as a measure to stem
organised timber theft of resources that are understood to 'belong'
(if only informally) to the village, a collective form of
management and protection appears to have facilitated the re-growth
of a once degraded forest. Such rehabilitation is a considerable
achievement, and the current benefits gleaned from the forest in
terms of products and services may perhaps provide the necessary
incentive for sustained protection by the villagers of
Budhikhamari, particularly as adverse conditions associated with
lack of forest have been experienced by the village.

The president of the VFPC, Gorachand Mohanta, articulated the
views of the villagers when he said that it was up to the local
community to protect and manage their forests, given the lack of
commitment by the Forest Department. Although the FD have been
broadly supportive of Budhikhamari VFPC, the villagers are
hostile towards the department and do not trust its motives,
particularly as the FD has tried to claim success in organising
the protection, and 'bask in the glory' of what is now being
called the 'Budhikhamari model'. Budhikhamari VFPC, therefore,
has not been incorporated into the official JFM structure, but
remains, as it was formed, a peoples' initiative.

However, when fieldwork was being undertaken, no forest
protection was occurring, due to conflicts between the FPC
members. Given that Mayurbhanj district has a downwards trend in
forest cover, the most recent assessments from satellites show a
5.35% reduction between 1995-1997 (MOEF, 1998), active forest
protection may be critical in maintaining the forests needed by
Budhikhamari and surrounds.